I'm actually neutral about which platforms I program for. I like programming no matter if its for Windows or Unix or some assembly language made for a processor you've never heard of. But if my customer likes the software product, then I also get paid. So as a programmer, if my customers like Windows then I like Windows too.
Back in my day there was no such thing as beating a game. There was Asteroids. There was no "winning" in Asteroids. You flew your spaceship trying to avoid and destroy chunks of space rock in a desperate attempt to stay alive. You would think to yourself, if I can make it past these, then I'm home free. But no matter how many asteroids you shot, there would be more. And they would move faster too. So you shoot those. And then there would be more. And you kept shooting them and shooting them, and manouvering around them and shooting them. And more and more came no matter how hard you tried. And then you died. Just like life.
Telephone wires fall under "natural monopolies", where the investment and effort of creating a competing version of the thing for sale creates such prohibitive barriers that the market naturally tends toward monopoly. Phones, roads, sewers, power lines are all this type of situation.
Telephone wires are not a natural monopoly. The cost for laying 10 wires is not a lot more than the cost of laying 1 wire.
Some idiot moderator labeled me a troll because they have a different viewpoint. How lame.
Anyway, I was not trying to say that big bad competiton is strangling the utility company. I'm saying the telephone company shouldn't be forced to share, that is all. Their competition comes from cable, satelite and others who are willing to build the infrastructure. It should not come from 'non-infrasturcture building' riders on their lines.
I also belive that any company should be allowed to petition city council to lay their own lines. There is nothing wrong with having redundant dsl or cable lines. It doesn't take that much extra space and the benefits from direct competition in infrastructure building are well worth it.
I think deregulation is a great idea. My cable modem service is good and the price is right, even though the cable company isn't forced to share with anyone. Think of it this way, would you build costly new infrastructure and spend a lot on maintenance if you were forced to share what you built with your competitors?
"a Utah law that requires Internet service providers to offer to block Web sites deemed pornographic"
The state has every right to regulate companies operating in that state. Note thaty are NOT forcincg censorship, just forcing companies to offer censorship if the customer wants it. I see no problem here.
I think he'd actually be pleasantly surprised at how long America has gone without a revolution.
Yep, we made it all the way to Dec. 20, 1860, when South Carolina seceded from the Union. Whoever says America is more divided than ever never studied History.
If you are in to FPSs, try Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory. It has level up elements, but once the server finishes rotating through the maps, everyone gets reset back to 0. Tons of fun and totally free.
Whenever I see something like this, I always think back to when I played multi-player MechWarrior (or whatever the equivalent name of it was) on the GEnie network. They charged several dollars PER HOUR. People that complain about $15/month crack me up.
While I don't think the whole idea of having to register a game to be able to play it (cuts down piracy.. for a while, at least) is bad maybe they should make it something like Windows XP's activation?
I like this idea. It would stagger the registrations so they don't all happen at the same time and, if they did it like Microsoft, it would allow registeration over the phone for those that don't have an Internet connection.
They'll look to see if the company is properly positioning itself to take advantage of future trends (AMD is), they'll look if they have the resources together to actually do it, and they'll see if the leadership behind the company is capable. AMD is really shining right now
AMD's resources are still in doubt... they have a lot of debt. But they are using that debt to make investments in the future. As long as their sales (and profits) are going up, it shouldn't be much of a problem... but if the market decides to tank again, AMD may be in a world of hurt. That's the risk side of owning stocks. That being said, I am a shareholder. And yes, I've held companies that have gone bankrupt before. So, take my advice and never invest more that you are willing to lose, on AMD or anyone else.
Well, I have no idea what the OP's reasons are, but here are mine:
1) Iraq. The more I read Iraqi blogs, the more I know it was the right decision. Sadam may not have been an immediate threat to us, but he was an immediate threat to many Iraqis. Also, regardless of the reasons for going to war in Iraq, we are currently fighting OBL's terrorists "over there" rather than here.
2) Taxes. Yes, I hate the deficit, but the way to reduce it is by cutting spending. Bush's tax cuts benefit me personally. From a philosophical point of view they also mean individuals will decide how to spend what they earn rather than the federal government deciding for them.
3) Social Security reform. Bush supports individual savings accounts. These mean the money might actually be there by the time I retire.
4) Supreme Court / abortion. I don't see the word abortion anywhere in the Constitution. This is an issue that should be decided by state legislatures, not the courts.
Go ahead and mod me down for not being a slashdot conformist.
And, to this point, the Bush administration has showed that it is very capable of declaring a war without good reasons. If the only war the US fought were about self-defense, the world would be much nicer, and terrorist wouldn't find it so easy to recruit new kamikazes willing to sacrifice to kill Americans.
Bush before 9/11 hadn't declared war on anyone but the terrorists still attacked us. While it might be nice to think that the only cause of terrorism is the US going to war, that is just not supported by events.
I don't know if it was the purpose of this bill, but, indeed, countries with draftees in their army tend to engage way much less in armed conflicts
The Russians and Israelis would probably disagree with you.
Just because the child points out that the emperor has no clothes does not cause the emperor to have no clothes. Granted, Greenspan may have caused people to wake up to the fact that they were being duped, but that was better for the economy than letting the bubble get even worse than it was. I don't really see what "zero-sum players" vs. "positive-sum players" has to do with anything.
The companies that were making real profits and had honest executives are either still around or were bought out to the benefit of their previous owners. The "new economy" investors that lost everything were primarily those who invested in companies run by con-artists.
However, it must be said the the biggest loss over those years was in telecommunications, not Internet start ups. Telecom is a real industry with real products that basically was over invested in and overleveraged (although the corrupt WCOM executives didn't help anything). Other than in the special case of Worldcom, it wasn't anyone's fault per say, just a lot of debt that was taken on to grow companies larger than their customers could support.
Now, the U.S. government is killing Iraqis, and destabilizing the government. Is that and improvement?
Yes. For far too long the United States has supported dictators and despots in the name of stability. The results of that were 9/11. Now we are bringing freedom and terrorists are bringing instability. It's going to be tough over the next few years or so, but in the long run a democratic Middle East where people can speak their mind without being jailed or killed will spawn less violent religious extreemism.
I don't think he's "burned out" so much as ready to move on. He's got a new child to spend time with and a human space flight industry to turn upside down. Both of these would be higher on my "things to do" list than making another game engine.
I'm sure he'll go back to doing what he's best known for sooner or later... especially if the rocket thing doesn't quite work out.
Slashdot Mirror
Sid Meyer's Civilization isn't like Avalon Hill's Civilization. But it is a lot like Walter Bright's Empire.
I'm actually neutral about which platforms I program for. I like programming no matter if its for Windows or Unix or some assembly language made for a processor you've never heard of. But if my customer likes the software product, then I also get paid. So as a programmer, if my customers like Windows then I like Windows too.
Back in my day there was no such thing as beating a game. There was Asteroids. There was no "winning" in Asteroids. You flew your spaceship trying to avoid and destroy chunks of space rock in a desperate attempt to stay alive. You would think to yourself, if I can make it past these, then I'm home free. But no matter how many asteroids you shot, there would be more. And they would move faster too. So you shoot those. And then there would be more. And you kept shooting them and shooting them, and manouvering around them and shooting them. And more and more came no matter how hard you tried. And then you died. Just like life.
If my local cable company can do it (privately owned before selling out to CableAmerica), so can SpeakEasy.
Telephone wires are not a natural monopoly. The cost for laying 10 wires is not a lot more than the cost of laying 1 wire.
Some idiot moderator labeled me a troll because they have a different viewpoint. How lame.
Anyway, I was not trying to say that big bad competiton is strangling the utility company. I'm saying the telephone company shouldn't be forced to share, that is all. Their competition comes from cable, satelite and others who are willing to build the infrastructure. It should not come from 'non-infrasturcture building' riders on their lines.
I also belive that any company should be allowed to petition city council to lay their own lines. There is nothing wrong with having redundant dsl or cable lines. It doesn't take that much extra space and the benefits from direct competition in infrastructure building are well worth it.
I think deregulation is a great idea. My cable modem service is good and the price is right, even though the cable company isn't forced to share with anyone. Think of it this way, would you build costly new infrastructure and spend a lot on maintenance if you were forced to share what you built with your competitors?
Should the law have been passed? Probably not, based on the free market principles you describe.
Is the law unconstitutional? Also, probably not. States have the right to regulate businesses, as stupid as those regulations can sometimes be.
"a Utah law that requires Internet service providers to offer to block Web sites deemed pornographic" The state has every right to regulate companies operating in that state. Note thaty are NOT forcincg censorship, just forcing companies to offer censorship if the customer wants it. I see no problem here.
Please excuse the spelling mistake in my previous post.
If the public schools can no longer teach science, then parents should be given vouchers to send thier children to private schools that can.
Yep, we made it all the way to Dec. 20, 1860, when South Carolina seceded from the Union. Whoever says America is more divided than ever never studied History.
If you are in to FPSs, try Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory. It has level up elements, but once the server finishes rotating through the maps, everyone gets reset back to 0. Tons of fun and totally free.
Whenever I see something like this, I always think back to when I played multi-player MechWarrior (or whatever the equivalent name of it was) on the GEnie network. They charged several dollars PER HOUR. People that complain about $15/month crack me up.
I like this idea. It would stagger the registrations so they don't all happen at the same time and, if they did it like Microsoft, it would allow registeration over the phone for those that don't have an Internet connection.
* Half-Life * Counter-Strike: Condition Zero * Day of Defeat * Team Fortress Classic * Deathmatch Classic * Opposing Force * Ricochet
AMD's resources are still in doubt... they have a lot of debt. But they are using that debt to make investments in the future. As long as their sales (and profits) are going up, it shouldn't be much of a problem... but if the market decides to tank again, AMD may be in a world of hurt. That's the risk side of owning stocks. That being said, I am a shareholder. And yes, I've held companies that have gone bankrupt before. So, take my advice and never invest more that you are willing to lose, on AMD or anyone else.
Well, I think the idea is you are supposed to enjoy the journey, not the destination.
Well, I have no idea what the OP's reasons are, but here are mine: 1) Iraq. The more I read Iraqi blogs, the more I know it was the right decision. Sadam may not have been an immediate threat to us, but he was an immediate threat to many Iraqis. Also, regardless of the reasons for going to war in Iraq, we are currently fighting OBL's terrorists "over there" rather than here. 2) Taxes. Yes, I hate the deficit, but the way to reduce it is by cutting spending. Bush's tax cuts benefit me personally. From a philosophical point of view they also mean individuals will decide how to spend what they earn rather than the federal government deciding for them. 3) Social Security reform. Bush supports individual savings accounts. These mean the money might actually be there by the time I retire. 4) Supreme Court / abortion. I don't see the word abortion anywhere in the Constitution. This is an issue that should be decided by state legislatures, not the courts. Go ahead and mod me down for not being a slashdot conformist.
Bush before 9/11 hadn't declared war on anyone but the terrorists still attacked us. While it might be nice to think that the only cause of terrorism is the US going to war, that is just not supported by events.
I don't know if it was the purpose of this bill, but, indeed, countries with draftees in their army tend to engage way much less in armed conflicts
The Russians and Israelis would probably disagree with you.
I don't think it's enforcable at all. The Constitution is The law of the land, along with its first ammendment.
The companies that were making real profits and had honest executives are either still around or were bought out to the benefit of their previous owners. The "new economy" investors that lost everything were primarily those who invested in companies run by con-artists.
However, it must be said the the biggest loss over those years was in telecommunications, not Internet start ups. Telecom is a real industry with real products that basically was over invested in and overleveraged (although the corrupt WCOM executives didn't help anything). Other than in the special case of Worldcom, it wasn't anyone's fault per say, just a lot of debt that was taken on to grow companies larger than their customers could support.
And use a pencil so we can correct your mistakes.
Now, the U.S. government is killing Iraqis, and destabilizing the government. Is that and improvement? Yes. For far too long the United States has supported dictators and despots in the name of stability. The results of that were 9/11. Now we are bringing freedom and terrorists are bringing instability. It's going to be tough over the next few years or so, but in the long run a democratic Middle East where people can speak their mind without being jailed or killed will spawn less violent religious extreemism.
I'm sure he'll go back to doing what he's best known for sooner or later... especially if the rocket thing doesn't quite work out.